Even before the the epsiode ended,i had a feeling how the ponds were going to leave.

Click to expand...

I take it you must not read anything about the show in advance, either spoilers or official statements from BBC or Moffat? Because we've known since the spring that this would the episode where the Ponds were going to leave. Indeed, Moffat himself revealed the Weeping Angels were going to be in the Ponds' farewell episode.

Unless you're wrong, in which case you've just altered a fixed point in time.

Click to expand...

It's just like replacing the Doctor with a lookalike robot. In this case, you're planting a headstone to keep up appearances.

Mr Awe

Click to expand...

Fixed points usually revolve around something historically significant that ALWAYS happened. Rory and Amy going back in time isn't unless they do something historically significant something so grandiose that it would become a fixed point... I don't see it though.

Surely them disappearing from their own timeline would be a bigger blunder to their personal timeline.

Click to expand...

It just sucks that they rebooted the entire universe and managed to bring back Amy's whole family, only for her to lose them again by getting zapped back in time. I really do want to see how the Doctor deals with Amy's family in the "present day," if he does at all.

Perhaps I should clarify, not the story of the episode (though that had pacing problems) but the story of the arch itself, indeed the season so far felt as if it doesn't make a lick of sense.

Click to expand...

Not a lick of sense? I don't know, it seemed to be pretty straightforward. The Doctor didn't want the Ponds to leave him, the Ponds were thinking about quitting anyway, and circumstances ultimately made the decision for them. That's the arc, isn't it? What's nonsensical about that? Or are you talking about something else?